Anyone in the house/senate or administration that isn't in favor of across the board spending cuts (including completely eliminating the rampant waste) should be immediately fired.

Gratch, point taken regarding the very real cost of this debacle. I felt the administration's strategy to over dramatize the impact of the sequester to be nothing more than an attempt to divert attention in leu of going to work on actually working with the house to come up with a real debt reduction plan and eliminate this kicking the can down the road bullshit that both sides are equally guilty of.

Well, at least you've backed off your attempt to portray the current administration as wanting sequestration.

As for the current administration not wanting to work with Congress on coming up with a mutually acceptable plan, I would say that it's probably more that Congress is less likely to work with them. Hell, even John Boehner couldn't even get his OWN folks to agree within their own party a few months back when the fiscal cliff was the financial problem of the moment. If they can't compromise within their own ranks, what makes you think they were able to assemble any kind of unified plan to present to the WH?

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

Anyone in the house/senate or administration that isn't in favor of across the board spending cuts (including completely eliminating the rampant waste) should be immediately fired.

Gratch, point taken regarding the very real cost of this debacle. I felt the administration's strategy to over dramatize the impact of the sequester to be nothing more than an attempt to divert attention in leu of going to work on actually working with the house to come up with a real debt reduction plan and eliminate this kicking the can down the road bullshit that both sides are equally guilty of.

Uh-huh.

Here's a recent article by Ezra Klein documenting, tweet by tweet, how negotiations on the sequester have been going.

Quote from: Ezra Klein

So let’s back up. [Republican strategist Mike] Murphy’s initial view was that to unlock GOP votes for a budget deal, Obama just needed to endorse chained CPI and more means-testing in Medicare. Then it was pointed out that Obama has endorsed means-testing in Medicare, so Murphy wondered why he didn’t endorse chained CPI as part of a deal. Then it was pointed out that Obama did endorse chained CPI, at which point Murphy called chained CPI “a gimmick,” and said Obama had to endorse raising the Medicare age, drop his demands for more revenue as part of a deal and earn back the GOP’s trust.

Short version: Republicans are making public demands about what it'll take to reach a budget deal, then when it's pointed out their demands are already part of the White House's proposal, they wave it off and move the goalposts farther back.

And it's all happening while Conservatives simultaneously try to argue that President Obama is just fearmongering about no big deal:

Quote from: Eco-Logic on March 04, 2013, 06:54:11 PM

The most ironic thing is that the idiotic scare tactics were being used to oppose what his idea to begin with.

...but also a terrible blight for which he should shoulder the blame.

Quote from: Eco-Logic on March 07, 2013, 12:11:52 PM

I hate that so many have been impacted by the sequester (Obama's idea from the start).

Aside from the lying, stalling, and shameless double-talking, though, Conservatives are probably really serious about pursuing honorable negotiations for the good of the country.

On Thursday, I attended a background briefing with one of the most respected Republicans in Congress. The rules on these gatherings is you can’t name those involved, but you can quote them. That gives the lawmaker room to be a bit more honest without fear of immediate public reprisal. The discussion was frank and, in a way, encouraging — it suggested that some of the gridlock in Washington is simply the result of poor information.

Would it matter, one reporter asked the veteran legislator, if the president were to put chained-CPI — a policy that reconfigures the way the government measures inflation and thus slows the growth of Social Security benefits — on the table?

“Absolutely,” the legislator said. “That’s serious.”

Another reporter jumped in. “But it is on the table! They tell us three times a day that they want to do chained-CPI.”

“Who wants to do it?” said the legislator.

“The president,” replied the reporter.

“I’d love to see it,” laughed the legislator.

You can see it. If you go to WhiteHouse.gov, the first thing you’ll see is an invitation to read the president’s plan to replace the sequester. That plan is only a page. “Savings from Superlative CPI” — another way of saying chained-CPI (consumer price index) — is one of the items in bold type.

And here's an NBC report coming out of President Obama's sit-down dinner with a group of Republican senators:

Quote from: NBC News

As for Obama’s dinner last night, it went very well, according to various NBC conversations with the GOP participants. It was serious. It was respectful. And it was informative. (In fact, one senator told us that he learned, for the first time, the actual cuts that the president has put on the table. Leadership hadn’t shared that list with them before)

You know what the first step is to convincing people that you're serious about solving big problems? Caring enough to occasionally glance at what those problems actually are.

He still isn't serious about making the across the board cuts necessary to get us out of this mess either.

He ran (and won) on a platform that repeatedly said he would revise the way the wealthy are taxed in this country. The major sticking point right now is that the republicans in congress are so worried about their political careers that they're saying "NO!" to any plan that includes tax hikes. If they were truly there to help this country, they'd compromise. Considering that the majority of the country backs the president's plan to include some tax hikes, I find it odd how you keep saying that Obama is the one that's torpedoing these talks.

While I'm unhappy with him right now for various reasons (drone strikes, etc.), I don't believe the blame lies mostly with Obama in this situation.

« Last Edit: March 08, 2013, 01:55:40 PM by hepcat »

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

While I'm unhappy with him right now for various reasons (drone strikes, etc.), I don't believe the blame lies mostly with Obama in this situation.

As a fellow independent, I agree with this. That said, what has happened to a president who could cross the aisle and make things happen? just by trading on his name and authority. Seems like we haven't had one since Clinton. Is this a result of low approval ratings? If so, who's fault are those? Not solely the repubs.

As a fellow independent, I agree with this. That said, what has happened to a president who could cross the aisle and make things happen? just by trading on his name and authority. Seems like we haven't had one since Clinton. Is this a result of low approval ratings? If so, who's fault are those? Not solely the repubs.

Not solely, just mostly. As AA pointed out above, the fact that the "rank and file" GOP politicians weren't even aware of which cuts Obama has actually proposed speaks volumes as to their leadership's willingness to even begin to compromise.

He started out optimistic and sure the GOP would come around if he took a middle of the road and try to build consensus. But as time went on and they dug their heels in (or moved further way as illustrated) he stopped trying and now it's politics as usual....actually worse than.

Like the President finally giving the republican leadership more than 7 minutes of his time?

He stopped his dog and pony show after his approval rating plummeted even more.

He still isn't serious about making the across the board cuts necessary to get us out of this mess either.

In a new budget proposal released earlier this week, House Republicans made sure to deny the community advocacy group ACORN access to federal funding of any kind. This should be an easy provision to satisfy considering ACORN ceased to exist in March of 2010. Link:

Quote from: The Huffington Post

A new short-term budget bill introduced on Monday by House Republicans includes a bizarre provision banning federal funding to anti-poverty group ACORN, despite the fact that the group has already been stripped of federal funding -- and has been defunct for nearly three years.

ACORN leaders announced that the group was disbanding in March 2010, after Congress cut off all federal funding to the organization. The provision in the current GOP budget bill [PDF], buried on page 221 of 269, would duplicate legislation that has already passed, to target an organization that does not exist.

Even if it were true that President Obama has been refusing to meet with Republican leadership -- and, of course, it isn't -- how would you like him to spend the time? Introducing the caucus to basic facts by reading newspaper articles aloud?

Eccy, eccy, eccy...i was being a smart ass in this thread long before this post. And while I love it when AA schools you every time he replies to one of your posts, I sometimes view him as a liberal version of you in that he sometimes gets a little TOO fanatical. However, unlike you, he actually attempts to back up those beliefs with facts. The only way you could get smacked down more is if you were dating Chris Brown.

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

See though, you all are simply low information monkeys in a cage that I sometime enjoy riling up. Your belief that I get smacked around in these threads add even more to the humor of the whole thing.

The government as a whole has to change and the spending has to be reigned in. Fiscally, this President has done more harm to this country than I'd ever imagined he would do. If you are on the other side of this belief you are delusional and not looking at the facts. As a 31 year old father of two young children I have no patience nor respect for a anyone that doesn't support comprehensive cuts in government spending. We are lucky that we print our own currency and even with that advantage it will eventually catch up to us and the resulting damage to the economy will far exceed the damage caused by the budget cuts.

FYI, I respect other opposing views (ie social views), but not this one. This is basic math and being on the opposing side of this argument is like telling me that 1+1=5.

The best part of your posts is when you try to tell everyone that YOU'RE the one who's riling people up. That's like a battered and defeated boxer laying on the floor of the ring and telling the audience that he's won.

Of course you view yourself as the winner in all discussions. But the reality of what happens when you get rebuttals is a mix of tragedy and comedy. It's tragic to watch you get slapped around, but funny when you realize you actually think you're winning any argument.

By the way, thanks for letting us know that our government needs to start saving money! It's not like both sides haven't been working on a budget to do just that. I know your simplistic knowledge of government equates to "Donkey bad! Elephant good!", but come on. You're not exactly MENSA material with summations like "we need to balance the budget!". I know you SAY you're allowed to work with money in the course of your day job...but I still find that hard to believe based on your almost clueless posts on the economy.

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

Yeah, I know. I just like messin' with Eco and watching him finally just wind down his posts with the "You're all stupid because you're stupid!" outburst. He usually does this when he's getting frustrated.

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.

The government as a whole has to change and the spending has to be reigned in. Fiscally, this President has done more harm to this country than I'd ever imagined he would do. If you are on the other side of this belief you are delusional and not looking at the facts. As a 31 year old father of two young children I have no patience nor respect for a anyone that doesn't support comprehensive cuts in government spending. We are lucky that we print our own currency and even with that advantage it will eventually catch up to us and the resulting damage to the economy will far exceed the damage caused by the budget cuts.

FYI, I respect other opposing views (ie social views), but not this one. This is basic math and being on the opposing side of this argument is like telling me that 1+1=5.

I don't think we disagree with the fact that government spending needs to be reigned in significantly. However:

1. The "blunt instrument" cuts implemented by sequestration (blunt by design) are an asinine way to do it.2. The GOP's position that we can balance the budget entirely by cutting without a single penny of additional revenue generated is complete fantasyland nonsense. There needs to be a middle ground. 3. The fact that expenditures and entitlements that were fine up until 1/19/09 and became "OMG EVIL MUSLIM SOSHZALIZM!!" a day later are what makes many of us

Quote from: Eco-Logic on March 12, 2013, 05:25:21 PM

See though, you all are simply low information monkeys in a cage that I sometime enjoy riling up. Your belief that I get smacked around in these threads add even more to the humor of the whole thing.

Sure is nice of you to come down from your perch to provide all us monkeys with...a distinct lack of any information at all other than Fox News talking points. I feel incredibly enlightened!

Oh snap, the monkeys have thrown down the gauntlet and began the usual school boy insults.

See though, the difference between us is that if things ever got really bad i would take a second job before milking the bloated entitlement system. Hep on the other hand would be first in line for an Obama phone I'm certain.

Is that like a Snoopy phone? I had one when I was a kid. Loved that thing. Don't recall it ever generating income though. Mostly I'd just use it to call an imaginary friend named Tuttle. Tuttle was a magic werewolf and we'd solve crimes involving chocolate and comic book thefts.

You ever own a phone, Eco? Was it shaped like a celebrity?

Logged

Warning: You will see my penis. -Brian

Just remember: once a user figures out gluten noting them they're allowed to make fun of you. - Ceekay speaking in tongues.